West Valley Demonstration Project Exemption Request for DOE O 151.1D

Department of Energy Washington, DC 20585 ,SEP 2 5 '017 MEMORANDUM FOR BRYAN C. BOWER DIRECTOR WEST VALLEY EMO STRA TION PROJECT _5aP,'. , JAMES A. HUTTON . ~,. ~, ~ DEPUTY ASSISTANT CRE ARYFOR SAFETY, SECURITY, AN QUALITY ASSURANCE FROM: SUBJECT: West Valley Demonstration Project Exemption Request The purpose of this memorandum is to respond to the West Valley Demonstration Project's April13, 2017, and July 24, 2017, memoranda concerning the request for an exemption to the Threat Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment (THIRA) requirement in the Department ofEnergy (DOE) Order 151.1D, Comprehensive Emergency Management System. Sites are required to identify threats and hazards, impacting the site and anticipated capabilities necessary to address them. The attached information submitted by your office, documenting a local government program for assessing threats and risk, meets the intent of the THIRA requirement. The Office of Emergency Operations in the National Nuclear Security Administration supports this dete1mination and we approve this request as an equivalency (see attachments). If you have any questions, please contact me or Mr. Jimmy McMillian, Director for Safeguards, Security and Emergency Preparedness, at (301) 903-5498. Attachments cc: James Owendoff, EM-1 (Acting) Joceline Nahigian, EM-2.1 DCOS Stacy Charboneau, EM-3 Kirk Lachman, EM-3 Kenneth Picha, EM-3 Melanie Pearson-Hurley, EM-3 Julie Goeckner, EM-3.1 Gregory Sosson, EM-3 .11/CNS Jimmy McMillian, EM-3 :114 Frank Moussa, EM-3.114 ® Printed with soy ink on recycled paper EM 3.114 Emergency Management Equivalency/Exemption Request Worksheet Requesting Site: West Valley Demonstration Project (WVDP) Type of Request: Exemption Equivalency X Site Exemption/Equivalency Request: Date of Request: April13, 2017 Reqwest Approval: Yes X No Pursuant to DOE Order 151.1D, 3.c.(1), the DOE West Valley Demonstration Project (WVDP) requests an exemption to DOE Order 151 .1D, Attachment 3, Section 2.d.(2) regarding the conduct of a THIRA in accordance with Department of Homeland Security (DHS), Comprehensive Preparedness Guide (CPG) 201, Threat and Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment Guide. The DHS CPG 201, is written as a community-based resource to assist in making decisions on how to manage risk to include developing needed capabilities. The WVDP site and Ashford Office Complex (AOC) offices are situated within municipalities. Formal relationships are documented via Memoranda of Understanding (MOU) or Letters of Agreement (LOA) with local agencies with first response capabilities in the event of an emergency requiring such resources. There is no cost benefit to the WVDP site, AOC, or DOE in preparing a THIRA in accordance with the CPG. Project funding, approximating $100,000, to complete and document a THIRA would need to be added to an already tight DOE-WVDP funding profile . The WVDP site is involved in a deactivation and decommissioning process, with no long-term mission . Preparing a THIRA provides no value added. NA-40 Opinion Conclusion: The WVDP appears to have all the necessary information on hand to input into the THIRA Builder Tool. Furthermore, NA-40 will provide technical support to WVDP in meeting the established requirement. Considering the information provided, WVDP request is not justified, as required by DOE Order 251.10, for exemption from the THIRA requirement. However, upon discussions and additional information provided by WVDP management and Deputy Assistant Secretary for Office Safety, Security and Quality Assurance, we recognize that the local government employs a different mechanism for assessing threats and risks that is very similar to the THIRA. Therefore, WVDP's request does meet a reasonable standard for an equivalency.

General Counsel Per DOE Order 251.1D states that the organization seeking the equivalency or exemption must request and obtain advice from the OPI and their relevant GC before submitting the request to the Head of the Departmental Element for approval. WVDP did not obtain opinion from GC, therefore EM 3.114 requested advice from Office of Chief Counsel at the EMCBC. Tom Aug, Supervisor General Attorney, Office of Chief Counsel EMCBC, General & Environmental Law Division EMAil Dated 2/26/2017: I looked at the PPD #8, as well as some CFR and USC references. Best I can tell, the THIRA is for communities to develop to help communities comply with PPD #8. The CFR requires various other plans, but not a THIRA. The DOE 0 151.1D is what makes the THIRA a requirement for DOE sites. Therefore, I do believe we can request an exemption, especially since the site has an All Hazards Survey. Under DOE 0 251.1D, I'm not sure who they are referring to when it states- (The Organization must) obtain advice from the OPI and their relevant GC office before submitting the request to the Head of the Departmental Element for approval. The OPI is Emergency Operations, which you have correctly included. Not sure ifthey are referring to the OPI's relevant GC office or our Chief Counsel's office, which falls under GC. Generally, when GC is referred to, the document is referring to HQ GC, but not for certain in this case. Regardless, I'm not seeing this exemption conflicting with any law or regulation. EM- 3.114 Comments EM 3.114 does not totally agree with the NA-40 opinion. The NA-40 opinion does not fully address the WVDPs concern of conducting a THIRA and the value added. It should be noted that WVDP does not have a fire department and relies heavily upon the local fire and EMS response agencies through established agreements. Therefore, most resource planning for emergencies and disasters are coordinated through the local response agencies. EM 3.114 does agree with NA-40 that a request for an equivalency would be more appropriated due to the additional information obtained from WVDP during the research of the exemption. Therefore, EM 3.114 recommends the approval of an equivalency to the order concerning THIRA. EM 3.114 Process Per, EM 3.114 Exemption/Equivalency Process procedure, the following three subjects shall be evaluated prior to rendering any conclusions: Contrary to law or regulations As stated above the exemption does not appear to conflict with any law or regulations beyond the DOE Order 151.1D requirement. Ensures adequate protection of the public, workers, and the environment As stated earlier the THIRA is written as a community-based resource to assist in making decisions on how to manage risk to include developing needed capabilities. The State of New York does not require the county to develop a THIRA. However, the state requires the county government to develop a County Emergency Preparedness Assessment (CEPA). CEPA is a framework and tool to help State and local stakeholders assess risk, capabilities, and the potential need for support and resources during emergencies or disasters. The Cattaraugus County CEPA includes the WVDP facility. Also, the site's emergency planning technical base documents, BNA, DSAs, and emergency plans, etc., are in-place to protect the public, workers, and the environment. Therefore, the exemption request does not affect the adequate protection of the public, workers, and the environment.

Remains consistent with the primary goal and purpose of the directive The purpose of the DOE Order 151.1D is to provide the Department of Energy, including the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA), policy for the development, management, and administration of the DOE Emergency Management System. This Order meets the requirements of Executive Orders, Policies, and Directives regarding emergency management; including Homeland Security Presidential Directive (HSPD) 5, which mandates that the Department adopt the National Incident Management System, in support of the National Response Framework. It assigns responsibilities, authorities, and accountabilities to the appropriate levels of Department management, promotes collaboration through consensus based programmatic decision making, and provides policy direction for coordination of these activities within the Department, and with other government and non-government organizations, to ensure efficiency and effectiveness. Considering the information provided in the WVDP THIRA exemption request and the additional information provided concerning the emergency planning of the State and local stakeholders assessing risk, capabilities, and potential need for support and resources during emergencies or disasters. It is determined that the exemption request of DOE Order 151.10 THIRA requirement does not affect the ability of WVDP to remain consistent with the primary goal and purpose of the directive. Additional Information: State of New York requires a County Emergency Preparedness Assessment (CEPA). The CEPA is a framework and tool to help State and local stakeholders assess risk, capabilities, and the potential need for support and resou rces during emergencies or disasters. The November 2016 Cattaraugus County CEPA includes the WVDP facility. It should be noted that the WVDP site and offices are situated within municipalities and as such, rely on local first response capabilities in the event of an emergency. Planning responsibilities for response needs are coordinated with the local response forces. Reviewer: Greg Campbell Date: 08/18/2017 Concurrence: Date: Department of Energy National Nuclear Security Administration Washington, DC 20585 August 10, 2017 MEMORANDUM FOR JAMES M. OWENDOFF THROUGH: FROM: SUBJECT: REFERENCES: ACTING ASSISTANT SECRETARY FOR ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT JAMES A. HUTTON DEPUTY ASSISTANT SECRETARY FOR OFFICE SAFETY, SECURITY AND QUALITY ASSURANCE 1..a_~ WILLIAM E. SMITij1;(;{j f;ie1)11ff!f'\ . ACTING ASSOCIATff ADMINISTRATOR FOR EMERGENCY OPERATIONS West Valley Demonstration Project Exemption Request 1. DOE Order 251.1D, Departmental Directives Program 2. DOE Order 151.1D, Comprehensive Emergency Management System 3. Memorandum, Exemption Request to Department Of Energy Order 151.1D, Comprehensive Emergency Management System, Conduct of a Threat and Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment, Dated April13 , 2017 II/A •. '!f ~~l ///IV~~~ National flucle•r SKurity A.dmlnl$tnJUon PURPOSE: In accordance with Reference 1 and Reference 2, this memorandum serves to document the advice provided from the Office of Primary Interest, the Associate Administrator for Emergency Operations (NA-40), to the Head of the Departmental Element, Assistant Secretary for Environmental Management, concerning Reference 3.

BACKGROUND: Pursuant to Reference 2, and Presidential Policy Directive (PPD) 8, NA-40 must prepare, for the Secretary of Energy, a DOE Enterprise Threat and Hazard Risk Profile that incorporates the sites and facilities submitted Threat and Hazard Identification and Risk Assessments (THIRA). Each site and facility THIRA is vital for NA-40 to complete a comprehensive DOE Enterprise Threat and Hazard Risk Profile. To ensure this process is deliberate, consistent and timely, NA-40 developed, through the Emergency Management Issues- Special Interest Group (EMISIG), a user-friendly tool for sites and facilities to develop their THIRA. The tool was piloted at several high hazard facilities, demonstrated at the annual EMISIG conference, and improved upon to the point that a complex THIRA can be completed within one working-day. NA-40 provides assistance for the use of the tool and development of THIRAs through the NA-40 Teclmical Assistance Program. 2 Under the THIRA program, Federal Emergency Management Agency helps Federal Agencies, States, Metro Areas, and Tribes identify specific threats and hazards associated with potential incidents, events or occurrences. This standardized process also allows the DOE to set capability targets as identified in the National Preparedness Goal as required in the PPD 8: National Preparedness, and provides a method for estimation of resources needed to meet the capability targets, thus enabling a community to understand how to best manage and plan for its greatest risks. CONCLUSION: The West Valley Demonstration Project (WVDP) appears to have all the necessary information on hand to input into the THIRA Builder Tool. Fmihermore, NA-40 will provide technical support to WVDP in meeting the established requirement. Considering the information provided above, and provided within Reference 3, WVDP's request is not justified, as required by Reference 1, for exemption from the THIRA requirement. However, upon discussions and additional information provided by WVDP management and the Deputy Assistant Secretary for Office Safety, Security and Quality Assurance, we recognize that the local government employs a different mechanism for assessing threats and risks that is very similar to the THIRA. Therefore, WVDP's request does meet a reasonable standard for an equivalency. RECOMMENDATION: It is the opinion and recommendation ofNA-40, that WVDP considers submission of an equivalency for the THIRA requirement rather than an exemption. The basis for the above recommendation is that according to WVDP, the local government employs a similar process for assessing Threats and Risks, but not the Department of Homeland Security THIRA. Approval of an equivalency for the THIRA requirement, would meet the intent of DOE Order 151,1D, Comprehensive Emergency Management System, for identifying and communicating potential hazards, threats, capability targets and resources to the local government and the Department of Energy. If you have any questions, please contact the Office of Emergency Operations (NA-40) at 202-586-3941. ,Jl~~. I Emergency ~ATE Management 8/16/2017 CATTARAUGUSCOUNTYCEPA RESULTS OVERVIEW DHSES EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT REGION V WNY ZONE 04 NOVEMBER 16 I ' * ~5~K I Emergency ~ATE Management • Hazard Assessment Review Hazard Focus Assessment Hazard Focus Analysis AGENDA • Capability Assessment Review Strengths I Enhancements Review • Training I Resources Requested • Recommended Plans

• Recommended Training Points I Recommended PTE Plan • Recommended State OEM Training Classes • Questions I ~ ' * r--0B~" I Emergency ~An Management HAZARD ASSESSMENT REVIEW • Most likely hazards: Flooding - Severe Winter Storm - Ice Storm (at least 1f2" or more) • Most Immediate required outside assistance (based on a major incident of one of the most likely hazards) Fatality Management I . . * ,.....J'l~l:'K I Emergency ~ATE Management * Weight based on Relative Risk Score HAZARD FOCUS ASSESSMENT Hazard Likelihood Consequence . . . . . . Flooding Very High High L Wildfire - - High High Cyber Attack High High Severe Winter Storms High Medium 12 Ice Storms (at least 1/2 inch or more) Medium High 12 Severe Wind.Tornado Medium High 12 Improvised Explosive Device (IED) I Vehicle Born IED Medium High 12 Hazmat Release Medium High 12 Hazmat Release - in transit Medium High 12 Radiological Release (Fixed Site) Medium High 12 Sustained Power Outage (three days or more) Medium High 12 Critical Infrastructure Failure Medium High 12 West Valley Facility- Transit High Medium 12 Food Contamination Medium Medium 9 Major Transportation Accident Medium Medium 9 Major Fires (non-Wildfires) Medium Medium 9 Pandemic Low High 8 Biological Agent Release Low High 8 Active Shooter Low High 8 Improvised Nuclear Device (IND) Low High 8 Radiological Dispersal Device (RDD) Low High 8 Dam Failure Low High 8 Hurricanes I Tropical Storm (Wind and Surge) Low Medium 6 Landslides Medium Low E Animal Disease I Foreign Animal Disease Low Medium 6 Extreme Temperatures Medium Low 6 Earth Quakes Very Low Medium 3 Drought Very Low Very Low 1 a - ' * r--0.WK I Emergency ~ATE Management HAZARD FOCUS ASSESSMENT * Weight based on Likelihood of occurrence '-'' uu~'" 1 • '"' 'I ,...,.. 1 • ~· r ~v" 1 • ~· r ~v.. 1 .----fla~. I Emergency ~An Management * Weight based on consequence HAZARD FOCUS ASSESSMENT r.Jl6'i:'K I Emergency ~ATE Management HAZARD FOCUS ANALYSIS • Based on your CEPA, your top three hazards for which you should be most prepared are below: Hazard Relative Risk Score Likelihood Flooding 20 Very High Severe Winter Storms 12 High Ice Storms (at least 1/2 inch or more) 12 High • These three are at the top of the cross section ·of the Relative Risk Score and the likelihood of occurring. • Your planning and training should focus on improving the capabilities required to respond to and recover from (e.g. damage assessment, cyber security, etc.) an incident like one of the above ~~ ~o;~~ .. CAPABILITIES ASSESSMENT REVIEW Response Capacity * Weight based on POETE Avg. 4~1=-~~.. STRENGTHS/ENHANCEMENTS REVIEW I . . * • Strengths: - Regional partnerships (county departments, agencies, local governments, and NGOs) - Robust communications system that supports COOP I COG - Partnership mitigation planning between Public Works and Emergency Services - Multi-jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan has 100°/o local government participation • Enhancement Opportunities: - Time for conducting training and drills on a regular basis - Formal Plans need to be developed for the following: - COOP I COG I Continuity of Facilities - Emergency Services I Public Works - Interoperable Communications - Recovery planning - Interoperable and Emergency Communications - Transportation and Fatality Management - Continued development and investment in communication systems ~~l:'K I Emergency ~ATE Management TRAINING/RESOURCES REQUESTED

1. Create a planning group to develop a COOP I COG Plan 2. Training and exercise for Mass Care & Sheltering 3. Mass casualty training and exercise in support of the EMS 4. Fatality Management training 5. Restoration of Infrastructure and Critical Services training and exercise I . ' * c-0~1rK I Emergency ~ATE Management RECOMMENDED PLANS Flooding Incident Specific Guideline (ISG) Flooding Incident Action Plan (lAP) r--0~1:'K I Emergency ~ATE Management RECOMMENDED TRAINING POINTS I . 0 * 1. Your training should address your enhancement opportunities in your capabilities assessment specifically addressing and preparing for capabilities that will be required in the event one of your most likely hazards occurs 2. It is recommended that you conduct training in crawl, walk, run phases and break it out quarterly and plan 12 months ahead 3. It is also recommended that training comes in a building block approach and all discussion based and operational exercises build off of one another 4. At the completion of your training plan all needs should have been addressed (e.g. push red areas to amber, push amber areas to green, and sustain green areas; utilizing most resources on red areas and limiting your use of resources of green areas) .-----0~li'K I Emergency ~ATE Management Monthly Overview Example Weekly Overview Example JAN Locate Stakeholders and Review current plans WK 1: Send current plan to all stake holders WK 2-3: All stake holders review WK4: Stakeholders update any necessary info based on last years exercises/ real world incidents RECOMMENDED PTE PLAN TRAINING PLAN FOR FLOODING RESPONSE & RECOVERY FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT Conduct Drills Meet with Conduct Tableto~ Meet with each (each stakeholders and Conduct Seminar Update/ revise Meet with or Workshop Update/ revise stakeholder stakeholder Update/ revise with key players plan stakeholders and exercise with key plan agency and agency plan prepare a update scenario conducting a drill scenario players update scenario for their responsibility) WK 1-3: Meet with each WK 1: Plan WK 1-2: All WK 1: Plan WK 1-2: All stakeholder WK 1-2: All meeting and stakeholders meeting I stakeholders individually and stakeholders Prepare scenario update/ revise Prepare scenario update/ revise update scenarios update/ revise so each framework current pian framework current plan stakeholder can current plan WK 1-4: Conduct conduct their WK 1-4: Conduct Tabletop or own drill Seminar Workshop WK 1-4: Conduct WK 2: Conduct (sometime this WK 2: Conduct (sometime this individual drills meeting and month when a meeting and produce a majority of produce a month when a with all scenario stakeholders can scenario majority of stakeholders attend) WK 3-4: Compile stakeholders can WK 3-4: Compile WK 4: Each WK 3-4: Compile updated plan and attend) updated plan and stakeholder updated plan and send to WK 3-4: Prepare send to stake prepare for their send to stakeholders for for tabletop or holders for drill stakeholders for WK 3-4: Prepare review workshop review review for seminar (whatever is most applicable) NOV DEC Meet with Conduct a stakeholders and functional or full finalize scenario scale exercise WK 1: Plan meeting I Prepare scenario framework WK 2: Conduct WK 1-4: Conduct meeting and produce the exercise finalized scenario WK 3-4: Prepare for functional or full scale exercise (whatever is most applicable) • Utilizing this battle rhythm can ensure that your county has all necessary plans up-to-date on a yearly basis and it helps to identify training and resource gaps • This plan will identify and drive additional training requirements • This battle rhythm is cyclical 4·1 ~~~~~ .. RECOMMENDED TRAINING COURSES 1. E0103: Planning: Emergency Operations 2. · SOEM: Organizing and Managing the Local EOC 3. E0288: Local Volunteer and Donations Management 4. G0386: Mass Fatalities Incident Response Course 5. E0417: Mass Care/Emergency Assistance Shelter Field Guide Training